Everything is purely chance. Welcome to evolution. By the way, most forms of life on the earth do not have separate genders, and seem to reproduce just fine. [/B]
"chance" was the wrong word to use. i understand that evolution is chance. what i meant was that evolution brought about a male and a female to reproduce, and that's the way it is, so live by it.
"chance" was the wrong word to use. i understand that evolution is chance. what i meant was that evolution brought about a male and a female to reproduce, and that's the way it is, so live by it.
And you still have not answered the question what this has to do with the right to marry? (see my reference to infertile hets).
"chance" was the wrong word to use. i understand that evolution is chance. what i meant was that evolution brought about a male and a female to reproduce, and that's the way it is, so live by it.
Obey evolution, your god?
Evolution have created a lot of infants that can be adopted by gay couples. Evolution have created insemination techniques that can make gay couples parents. Maybe gay couples are evolutions answer to declining fertility and third worlds coutries missing ability to support its children? Evolution moves in mysterious ways.
"chance" was the wrong word to use. i understand that evolution is chance. what i meant was that evolution brought about a male and a female to reproduce, and that's the way it is, so live by it.
1) Don't tell me what to do.
2) I would never be happy with a female. I am not attracted to females. I never have been. I am only sexually attracted to males. Why should I marry a female I can't even have a satisfying sexual relationship with?
3) If I were to marry a male, and be happy, pay my taxes, harm no one and so on and so forth, who, precisely, is being harmed? Where's the negative?
I have more to say, but it'll have to wait until after church.
In fact some argue that nature requires the male to copulate often and with many different females in order to propulgate the male's genetic material. Males are supposedy predisposed to promiscuity... perhaps monogomy and therefor marriage is un-natural.
But then again the desire to form a family unit is for the protection of the offspring... and that genetic material.
Maybe that's why men dump their wives when they get past child bearing age for younger women... so they can have more kids.
Evolution have created a lot of infants that can be adopted by gay couples. Evolution have created insemination techniques that can make gay couples parents. Maybe gay couples are evolutions answer to declining fertility and third worlds coutries missing ability to support its children? Evolution moves in mysterious ways.
Commandment #45: Thou shalt not confuse meddling science with evolution.
The genetic predisposition argument is some seriously shoddy science.
Maybe homosexuality..blah....blah....
Last time I checked, I wasn't inclined to grant something off maybe.
Two people and commitment. Why two? If it has nothing to do with sex organs, then it has even less to do with a number. The age argument, or polygamy have even less basis than homosexuality and yet we uphold them. (for now)
"chance" was the wrong word to use. i understand that evolution is chance. what i meant was that evolution brought about a male and a female to reproduce, and that's the way it is, so live by it.
what does reproduction have to do with it. i don't recall anywhere on my marriage certificate that says "...now go out make babies". many people that are married choose never to have children, just like many people that have children are not married. who gives a shit? just because you feel that homosexual existence isn't "natural", doesn't diminish the fact that it's quite "natural" to those that are homosexual.
Commandment #45: Thou shalt not confuse meddling science with evolution.
Just playing his game. He attached normative attributes to evolution. I tried to show that I could just as easily attach opposite attributes making his (and my adopted) claims false.
For clairification: I don´t belong in the "God" or "evolution" category. I belong to the combined society/social construction/whatever you want category
hey you know what. i'm the only person in here taking this side, so rather than waste my efforts, i'll leave you all to talk amongst yourselves. no i'm not just leaving cause i have nothing more to say... it's just that i'm not gonna convince you all of anything just as you wont convince me anything. even though i dont agree with any of you, i respect your right to believe what you want to believe. so, with that, good-bi.
and let me clarify my stance on things. in all honestly, i dont mind that people are gay. i cant change it, so i might as well accept it. wont i dont like are the fundamental values of our society being ripped apart because some people feel mistreated by the law. surely there must be some reason that there isnt already gay marriage. did the late 90's cause more people to be gay or something????? thats why i say that being gay is a mental thing. if there was this much debate from the beginning, this issue would have been solved before the civil war.
Textbook circular logical fallacy.
You're rationalizing the way things are as a result of...the way things are.
And whose values are being "ripped apart?" Those of a largely rich, white, christian, and heterosexual patriarchy? Good.
hey you know what. i'm the only person in here taking this side, so rather than waste my efforts, i'll leave you all to talk amongst yourselves. no i'm not just leaving cause i have nothing more to say... it's just that i'm not gonna convince you all of anything just as you wont convince me anything.
Well, at least give the guy credit for not going in circles. We need more people who agree to disagree. Then again, most of our AO threads wouldn't get past the first page if that were true.
even though i dont agree with any of you, i respect your right to believe what you want to believe.
Yeah, yeah. I'm getting so sick of seeing that cut-n'-paste line in all of you WASP idiot's posts. Grow a friggin cerebelum for chrizzakes. Oh, wait, you can't. That would imply evolution.
Comments
A breakdown is society??? They're getting MARRIED not divorced. They're creating a bond they hope will last "as long as they both shall live".
Originally posted by Kirkland
Everything is purely chance. Welcome to evolution. By the way, most forms of life on the earth do not have separate genders, and seem to reproduce just fine. [/B]
"chance" was the wrong word to use. i understand that evolution is chance. what i meant was that evolution brought about a male and a female to reproduce, and that's the way it is, so live by it.
Originally posted by chu_bakka
And still no one has given me a reason why two adults getting married affects me in any way.
I guess hyperactive conservative minds cannot avoid the thought that they could be the one who is penetrated one day
Originally posted by ipodandimac
"chance" was the wrong word to use. i understand that evolution is chance. what i meant was that evolution brought about a male and a female to reproduce, and that's the way it is, so live by it.
And you still have not answered the question what this has to do with the right to marry? (see my reference to infertile hets).
Originally posted by ipodandimac
"chance" was the wrong word to use. i understand that evolution is chance. what i meant was that evolution brought about a male and a female to reproduce, and that's the way it is, so live by it.
Obey evolution, your god?
Evolution have created a lot of infants that can be adopted by gay couples. Evolution have created insemination techniques that can make gay couples parents. Maybe gay couples are evolutions answer to declining fertility and third worlds coutries missing ability to support its children? Evolution moves in mysterious ways.
Originally posted by ipodandimac
"chance" was the wrong word to use. i understand that evolution is chance. what i meant was that evolution brought about a male and a female to reproduce, and that's the way it is, so live by it.
1) Don't tell me what to do.
2) I would never be happy with a female. I am not attracted to females. I never have been. I am only sexually attracted to males. Why should I marry a female I can't even have a satisfying sexual relationship with?
3) If I were to marry a male, and be happy, pay my taxes, harm no one and so on and so forth, who, precisely, is being harmed? Where's the negative?
I have more to say, but it'll have to wait until after church.
In fact some argue that nature requires the male to copulate often and with many different females in order to propulgate the male's genetic material. Males are supposedy predisposed to promiscuity... perhaps monogomy and therefor marriage is un-natural.
But then again the desire to form a family unit is for the protection of the offspring... and that genetic material.
Maybe that's why men dump their wives when they get past child bearing age for younger women... so they can have more kids.
Did nature create the bill of rights?
We are more than the sum of our parts.
Originally posted by Anders
Obey evolution, your god?
Evolution have created a lot of infants that can be adopted by gay couples. Evolution have created insemination techniques that can make gay couples parents. Maybe gay couples are evolutions answer to declining fertility and third worlds coutries missing ability to support its children? Evolution moves in mysterious ways.
Commandment #45: Thou shalt not confuse meddling science with evolution.
Originally posted by trumptman
The genetic predisposition argument is some seriously shoddy science.
Maybe homosexuality..blah....blah....
Last time I checked, I wasn't inclined to grant something off maybe.
Two people and commitment. Why two? If it has nothing to do with sex organs, then it has even less to do with a number. The age argument, or polygamy have even less basis than homosexuality and yet we uphold them. (for now)
Nick
Polygamy should be legal.
Originally posted by ipodandimac
"chance" was the wrong word to use. i understand that evolution is chance. what i meant was that evolution brought about a male and a female to reproduce, and that's the way it is, so live by it.
what does reproduction have to do with it. i don't recall anywhere on my marriage certificate that says "...now go out make babies". many people that are married choose never to have children, just like many people that have children are not married. who gives a shit? just because you feel that homosexual existence isn't "natural", doesn't diminish the fact that it's quite "natural" to those that are homosexual.
Those who go to great lengths to become parents might be better at it than those who end up there by mistake.
Originally posted by Jubelum
Commandment #45: Thou shalt not confuse meddling science with evolution.
Just playing his game. He attached normative attributes to evolution. I tried to show that I could just as easily attach opposite attributes making his (and my adopted) claims false.
For clairification: I don´t belong in the "God" or "evolution" category. I belong to the combined society/social construction/whatever you want category
Originally posted by ipodandimac
and let me clarify my stance on things. in all honestly, i dont mind that people are gay. i cant change it, so i might as well accept it. wont i dont like are the fundamental values of our society being ripped apart because some people feel mistreated by the law. surely there must be some reason that there isnt already gay marriage. did the late 90's cause more people to be gay or something????? thats why i say that being gay is a mental thing. if there was this much debate from the beginning, this issue would have been solved before the civil war.
Textbook circular logical fallacy.
You're rationalizing the way things are as a result of...the way things are.
And whose values are being "ripped apart?" Those of a largely rich, white, christian, and heterosexual patriarchy? Good.
Originally posted by ipodandimac
hey you know what. i'm the only person in here taking this side, so rather than waste my efforts, i'll leave you all to talk amongst yourselves. no i'm not just leaving cause i have nothing more to say... it's just that i'm not gonna convince you all of anything just as you wont convince me anything.
Yeah, your arguments are pretty bad. Good move.
Sing it Freddy!
Originally posted by ipodandimac
good-bi.
Exactly why we like same-sex marriage.
Originally posted by ipodandimac
being gay is just a mental thing that people do to themselves because they want attention (oops... did i say that out loud?).
Wow. Just....wow. That has to be the most unbelievably naive and idiotic statement I've ever seen here. Period. It also borders on the most offensive.
Myself, I applaud the decision. Of course it will be overturned in '05, but hey, baby steps my friends, baby steps.
Originally posted by ipodandimac
even though i dont agree with any of you, i respect your right to believe what you want to believe.
Yeah, yeah. I'm getting so sick of seeing that cut-n'-paste line in all of you WASP idiot's posts. Grow a friggin cerebelum for chrizzakes. Oh, wait, you can't. That would imply evolution.
*screams into pillow*